In many projects that are notifiable under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996, it is often necessary that additional opinions are required. The best example is where the Adjoining Owner’s surveyor requires that a checking engineer is instructed to undertake an evaluation of the proposed project. The reasons for using a checking engineer are many although the primary reason being that the surveyor is not able to offer a valid opinion on structural calculations or more advanced structural concerns.
Under section 10(13) the Act empowers the surveyors to determine the reasonable costs in the making of the Award and this may include the requisite sub-consultants fees associated with the project to which the Award relates. While not expressly provided, the professional’s fees are to be included. Onigbanjo v Pearson  BLR 507.
Such costs also include matters referred to the Third Surveyor in an informal context. Costs associated with an advanced level of legal action; however, are not included for inside the Act whether actual or contemplated [decided on appeal 2018], since the Act’s primary purpose is to provide ways to address dispute without resorting to the courts, as such, costs associated with matters breaching common law rights and obligations and subsequent common law and equitable remedies i.e. damages and injunctions are not afforded under the Act. Blake v. Reeves  EWCA Civ 611,  1WLR 1,  All ER (D) 253 (June).